The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Although there are no options attached we can say the following.
Indeed, global warming has been in the foreground of politics and science for quite some time. There have been numerous studies conducted on the effects of global warming and what we might do to mitigate any threats. I think some policymakers are wary of the findings and some can trust that the conclusions are sound for the following reason.
Politicians are wary because, in reality, there are no 100% conclusive arguments that confirm that global warming is the result of humans. For other politicians, the evidence provided by environmental institutions is valid and they are prompt to proclaim that humans are to blame for global warming.
What is real, is that earth scientists think that global warming caused significant climate change in the past. And when they say the past, they mean a time before humans appeared on planet earth.
Climate change or global warming is not new for planet earth. It is a phenomenon that has happened in the past according to scientists and national agencies. It is believed that global warming had caused natural disasters such as the melting of ice caps and the flooding of many lands on Earth, destroying life forms.
That is why right now, many agencies are closely researching climate change. Among those institutions are the US National Academy of Sciences, the Geological Society of America, the American Meteorological Society, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
The human brain i believe
Answer&Explanation:
This principle refers to those action which are legally permitted but are also likely to result to severe impact which wasn't initially intended like the death of a person as a side effect of the good action that was actual intended.
For example a doctor may give a patient some pills to relieve stress symptoms eventhough the doctor knows that this may have side effect such as actual shortening their life.
The doctor's intention are not to kill the patient but the death would be a side effect of the good results which are to reduce the patient's pain.
Another example is in the warfare where soldiers may go on a mission that requires that what ever action they take few civilian may get hurt in the process but the intention isn't to kill those civilian but it is a side effects of the good operation of eliminating the legitimate target which may be a threat to a country.
Answer:
demolition of the berlin conference in november1989 mikhail Gorbachev declaration union would no longer use its military
The studies that have been determined with boys playing in
groups is that they are mostly engaged in tumble, rough, aggressive and high activity
play rather than girls playing in groups as they are likely to engage in this
activities.
